The registration application was developed by the state of Washington, Facebook and Microsoft

The state of Washington will be the first to offer a voter registration option on Facebook as soon as next week.

Washington state citizens will soon have the option to register to vote on Facebook via an application on the Secretary of State's Facebook page. The application was developed by the state of Washington, Facebook and Microsoft.

"In this age of social media and more people going online for services, this is a natural way to introduce people to online registration and leverage the power of friends on Facebook to get more people registered," said Shane Hamlin, co-director of elections.

Here's how it works: Washington residents go to the secretary of state's Facebook page and click on the registration application. They will agree to let Facebook access their information, and their name and date of birth will be added automatically to their registration form. Then, residents will have to provide a driver's license or state ID number.

In addition to registering to vote, Washington state citizens can obtain information on candidates to help them make voting-related decisions.

"We are excited that citizens in Washington state will be able to register to vote and review useful voting information on Facebook," said Andrew Noyes, Facebook spokesman.

For those worried about Facebook accessing private information for the voter registration form, it's been noted that Facebook doesn't have access to the state's database. The only information Facebook uses is your name and date of birth.

The Washington state voter registration form on Facebook is expected to launch next week.

quote: You are an idiot. Nothing you've said is backed up by anything truthful. You, essentially, repeated all those ridiculous Faux News talking points. It's really pathetic that you don't think critically.

Nothing I've said is "backed up" or is what you're really saying that you don't like the truth so you're going to substitute it with a glass of kool-aid like most commiecrats do?

The ACORN scandal DID happen, initially around 1998. In 1998 they simply filed fake voter registrations using dead people, non-existent people or people who are otherwise not legally able to vote. They continued this through 2009 where they actually PAID people to vote.

They would target minorities, poor people and others who would vote for "their" candidate...in 2009 it was Obama. Too bad they did not get shut down before the election happened...they were finally disbanded in 2010...but there are still plenty of these "voter fraud organizations" in existence. Rock The Vote comes to mind...same sh1t different name.

Fox News talks about the issues that liberal media outlets ignore - but that doesn't the issues they bring up a fabrication. Most media outlets are controlled by the same people who are funding Obama's expensive campaign and desperately trying to keep him in power so they can solidify their agenda.

What's truly pathetic is that you cannot view political issues objectively; you want to selectively browse headlines and accept what you agree with as "fact" and what you don't like or disagree with as "lies".

The fact is voter fraud happened, ACORN was one organization involved with it, and this fraud is just one of the many questionable elements surrounding the Obama presidency. He has already demonstrated that he is utterly incapable of performing the job adequately...but by relying on fraud and deception he is able to cling to power.

quote: Fox News talks about the issues that liberal media outlets ignore - but that doesn't the issues they bring up a fabrication. Most media outlets are controlled by the same people who are funding Obama's expensive campaign and desperately trying to keep him in power so they can solidify their agenda.

Fox News is controlled by Republicans. I wonder what their agenda is... Pot meet kettle? One of these days someone will insist that the media separate Entertainment from News into separate channels so media can be obliged to be objective. I'd watch that news channel - because it would be real news without the slanted, obviously tilted commentary, that makes Fox News so disgustingly perverted.

quote: Fox News is controlled by Republicans. I wonder what their agenda is... Pot meet kettle? One of these days someone will insist that the media separate Entertainment from News into separate channels so media can be obliged to be objective .

And let me know when that day is so I can start watching ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, and reading the New York Times, Time magazine, and listening to NPR, ALL entities of which have a clear and unapologetic left wing/liberal/Democrat bias.

See, that's where people like you can't see the forest through the trees. You people can't differentiate between COMMENTARY and NEWS (as if MSNBC doesn't have their own perverted, disgusting left wing slant rants or something).

Oh and by the way - when I watch Hannity or O'Reilly, they ALWAYS have a left wing/liberal/Democrat voice on their shows. I RARELY see any counter-point guest on, say, Chris "thrilling feeling up the leg" Matthews or Rachel "Beware the power of the pajama-clad, Cheeto-eating, twitter, blogging hordes" Maddow, or my favorite left wing liberal rant-o-dramaqueens Joy Behar and Bill Maher.

Fox News doesn't have an "agenda" aside from making profits. Their ratings indicate, by far, the people feel they are the most informative and least biased news source. And that makes them the most profitable. Sorry this simple logic offends you.

Fox News has shows scheduled at 2am that get more viewership than prime time MSNBC shows. Why? Because that network is Liberal propaganda and only panders to the Left. Fox News could not get the ratings they do if they were "Republican controlled" propaganda.

And "disgustingly perverted"? LMAO, are you just throwing any words out you can think of?

That's the talent. Talent doesn't "run" news networks. Murdoch's party affiliations don't matter because if you believe a gillionair mogul is sitting there playing program director at Fox News, you're nuts.

And who do you think you're talking to? You can't just come in here, some nobody, register and then immediately go head to head with THE Reclaimer.

Best thing you can do is unregister. 1, I've never lost an argument and 2. the last thing we need is ANOTHER liberal idiot on here.

You have to love how they feel the need to register under a new alias to start snapping and snarling and hurling insults (like the new alias name) instead of intellectually and honestly debating. It means you already won.

quote: Murdoch's party affiliations don't matter because if you believe a gillionair mogul is sitting there playing program director at Fox News, you're nuts.

Are you f'ing kidding? It is a documented fact that Rupert Murdoch leverages his control of media to influence elections and government affairs both in the US and in the UK. This is common knowledge. If you're ignorant of that fact then you are willfully so. FFS the man isn't even discreet about it. And he doesn't have to be, because most people, like you, won't ever give thought as to his motivations. Most people watching Fox News probably couldn't even tell you who owned the network if asked.

quote: I've never lost an argument

Good one. Keep telling yourself that and maybe you'll start to believe it. I'm not sure I've ever read a more ironic and untrue statement in my life.

quote: Are you f'ing kidding? It is a documented fact that Rupert Murdoch leverages his control of media to influence elections and government affairs both in the US and in the UK. This is common knowledge. If you're ignorant of that fact then you are willfully so. FFS the man isn't even discreet about it. And he doesn't have to be, because most people, like you, won't ever give thought as to his motivations. Most people watching Fox News probably couldn't even tell you who owned the network if asked.

Rupert Murdoch, like anyone living in the USA and UK, is allowed to voice his opinions on current events. It just so happens that people pay more attention to a guy like Murdoch than they do some schmuck camping out on Wall St complaining about income inequities.

Does that count as political influence? Maybe...but at least he's playing by the rules.

How are commiecrats staying in power? They are relying on decidedly illegal methods:

- Voter fraud

- Selective non-enforcement of Federal laws to bolster voting pool (aka not deporting illegals and allowing them to vote).

- Allowing people who are not legally authorized to vote to cast ballots.

- Endorsement of welfare programs that do not encourage self-reliance, and then implying that if the people do not keep them in power they will lose their livelihood (welfare checks).

They also tell blatant lies, which is not necessarily illegal but should be considered fraud. For example, Obama was really going at Romney with the Bain Capital angle when at the very same time he is accepting donations from employees and executives at Bain.

He makes it seem like Bain outsourced everything and is the only US company doing that, but does not mention the fact that Bain Capital helped many well-known American companies stay in business and not become more victims of the obamaconomy.

So yeah, if you want to rag on Murdoch for legally being vocal about his views and using is own money and property to make his views known, I guess you are right...but at least he's not paying people to vote.

If you want to say, who controls....that would be Roger Ailes. Yes he is Republican, but so what. He's also a former NBC executive...o'my. MSNBC use to be controlled by the Republicans! At least until Ailes left....<sigh>

quote: Fox News is controlled by Republicans. I wonder what their agenda is... Pot meet kettle? One of these days someone will insist that the media separate Entertainment from News into separate channels so media can be obliged to be objective. I'd watch that news channel - because it would be real news without the slanted, obviously tilted commentary, that makes Fox News so disgustingly perverted.

If by disgustingly perverted you mean relatively unbiased and accurate, then it looks like we're in agreement.

Commiecrats/Libtards don't actually know what they're talking about and as a group, could never have made a country as great as America in the first place. Ask them to defend any of their idiotic views and they'll IMMEDIATELY try to deflect or change the topic - anything to avoid having to justify their position. It's like you idiots think that just because you can have an opinion and not become a political prisoner (yet) that you should have the most asinine opinion possible even if there is no logic or reason behind it...as long as it sounds nice.

You HAVE TO be that way to support someone as obviously incompetent as Obama. Do I like Romney? No, not really...if I had my pick for the next president it would have been Ron Paul and the reason is simple - he wants to reduce the size and scope of the government and that's exactly what needs to be done to get the USA back on track. Romney is still a far better option that Obama simply because he has experience and a track record of GETTING THINGS DONE, especially when it comes to business.

Most of the big media outlets are dripping with left wing propaganda, and they know that most lefties are idiots who will not question what is said so long as it has that sweet berry flavor they know and love. OOOOOOOO YEAH!

Really? You do know that in all of the investigations, there was no illegal activity by Acorn...right? Fox didn't report THAT part of the story because they want people like you to remain uninformed.

Case in point:Independent external investigation by Proskauer Rose

On September 16, 2009, ACORN suspended advising new clients and initiated an independent review process, headed by Scott Harshbarger, an attorney from the Proskauer Rose firm and a former Massachusetts Attorney General.[95][96] On September 16, Bertha Lewis, ACORN's CEO, froze admission to all of ACORN's service programs and instituted a review committee to implement organizational reforms.[97][98] The independent external investigation found that while some of the counsel given by employees and volunteers was "unprofessional and inappropriate", the videos that had been released appeared to have been edited, "in some cases substantially", and ACORN employees had taken no illegal actions.[99]

[edit] Report by the Congressional Research Service

On December 22, 2009, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) released a report on ACORN activities, commissioned by the House Judiciary Committee. It stated that ACORN has not been found to violate any federal regulations in the past five years. In addition, findings included: There were no instances of voter fraud by individuals who were allegedly registered to vote improperly by ACORN or its employees; No instances where ACORN violated terms of federal funding in the last 5 years. The CRS found that O'Keefe and Giles may have violated Maryland and California laws banning the recording of face-to-face conversations without consent of both parties.[100][101]

[edit] Investigation by New York attorney general

The New York Attorney General, Andrew Cuomo, began an investigation on September 15, 2009, to ensure that state grants given to ACORN were properly spent.[102][103] The New York City Council suspended all ACORN grants while the Brooklyn District Attorney's Office conducted an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the videos.[104] On March 1, 2010, the District Attorney's office for Brooklyn determined that the videos were "heavily edited" to give a misleading impression,[7] and concluded that there was no criminal wrongdoing by the ACORN Brooklyn staff filmed in the videos.[8] A law enforcement source said, "They edited the tape to meet their agenda."[9][105]

On September 25, 2009, in response to Governor Schwarzenegger's request to investigate the incidents, the California Attorney General's office opened an investigation "into the controversy surrounding videos that purportedly show members of community organizing group ACORN giving advice on how to open a brothel".[106]

On April 1, 2010, Attorney General Jerry Brown announced the office's findings, based on its review of new unedited videotapes recorded in the California offices of ACORN, as well as other evidence.[13] The AG had granted O'Keefe and Giles immunity from prosecution in exchange for the raw videotapes. The report noted that the terms of the exchange did not exempt O'Keefe or Giles from being sued separately by the ACORN members filmed in the videos.[10] Citing the 1967 Invasion of Privacy Act, Attorney General Office's report stated that "an application of these principles to the facts presented here strongly suggests that O'Keefe and Giles violated state privacy laws and provides fair warning to them and others that this type of activity can be prosecuted in California."[10]

The Attorney General Office criticized O'Keefe for not acting as a journalist trying to objectively report a story from the facts, noting instead that O'Keefe stated he "was out to make a point and to damage ACORN".[10] The report said, "The video releases were heavily edited to feature only the worst or most inappropriate statements of the various ACORN employees and to omit some of the most salient statements by O'Keefe and Giles. Each of the ACORN employees recorded in California was a low level employee whose job was to help the needy individuals who walked in the door seeking assistance. Giles and O'Keefe lied to engender compassion, but then edited their statements from the released videos."[10]

For instance, one much-publicized recording had shown O'Keefe and Giles at the San Diego office. They show a worker purportedly seeking information from a contact in Mexico to help them smuggle underage girls from Mexico into the United States to work as prostitutes. The video did not show that the worker's 'contact' in Mexico was a police official. The employee collected as much specific information from Giles and O'Keefe as possible during their visit. The worker then contacted Mexican police to warn them of the plot.[107] The AG Office's report stated, "ACORN was not the criminal enterprise described by O'Keefe in his 'Chaos for Glory' statement – it did not receive billions in federal funds and did not control elections. ACORN is, however, disorganized and its operations were far from transparent, leaving it vulnerable to allegations of illegal activity and misuse of funds."[10] The report also noted that despite O'Keefe's appearing in the released videos in "stereotypical 1970s pimp garb", in his actual taped sessions with ACORN workers, he was dressed in a shirt and tie, presented himself as a law student, and said he planned to use the prostitution proceeds to run for Congress, and never claimed he was a pimp.[10]

The report of the Attorney General Office concluded, "Even if O'Keefe and Giles had truly intended to break the law, there is no evidence that any of the ACORN employees had the intent to aid and abet such criminal conduct or agreed to join in that illegal conduct." While faulting a few of the recorded ACORN members for "terrible judgment and highly inappropriate behavior",[10] The investigation report also concluded that "ACORN could determine that the conduct of its employees in California was inappropriate, but that is an employment matter, which does not rise to the level of a law enforcement or governmental concern", and determined that the employees did not commit prosecutable crimes in California. Regarding this contrast between the publicity related to the videos and what actually transpired, Attorney General Brown stated, "The evidence illustrates that things are not always as partisan zealots portray them through highly selective editing of reality. Sometimes a fuller truth is found on the cutting room floor."[13]